Upload
others
View
1
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
3 1 0 S P E C T R U M . D I A B E T E S J O U R N A L S . O R G
In 2017, ~30 million Americans had diabetes. The total estimated direct and indirect costs of diag-
nosed diabetes in the United States was estimated at $327 billion (1). In addition, 84 million Americans had prediabetes, a condition in which blood glucose levels are higher than normal but not high enough for a diabetes diagnosis (2). Prediabetes is reversible, and, if addressed properly, type 2 diabetes can be prevented or delayed (3). Therefore, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) emphasizes the importance of ensuring that people have appropri-ate knowledge, are screened or tested for prediabetes and type 2 diabetes, and, if appropriate, are directed to ev-idence-based prevention or treatment options.
There are scientific and practice- based approaches to disseminating knowledge, conducting screening and testing, and referring and offering options for chronic disease prevention and management (4–8), including for prediabetes and type 2 diabetes (8). However, almost 90% of people with prediabetes are unaware of their condition, making type 2 diabetes prevention a challenge (3).
Evidence-based interventions for preventing, delaying, or managing type 2 diabetes largely focus on long-term, achievable behavior changes (9–15). Such lifestyle changes may seem overwhelming to individuals for many reasons, including what some call an “obesogenic environment” in which consumers are surrounded by external stimuli making healthy choices difficult (16).
Meeting people where they are in their decision-making process may increase our ability to reduce the burden resulting from prediabetes and type 2 diabetes. This, in part, may involve shaping decision points so that healthier lifestyle alternatives become a thoughtful deliberative decision, stand out from the noise, are easier to choose, or feel less costly in terms of time, emotional com-mitment, or risk. Understanding the journey that individuals travel toward preventing type 2 diabetes can help public health professionals improve our effectiveness in reaching and engaging people at risk for prediabe-tes and type 2 diabetes.
In this article, we describe a consumer journey map that we devel-oped to visualize pathways people
Nudging to Change: Using Behavioral Economics Theory to Move People and Their Health Care Partners Toward Effective Type 2 Diabetes PreventionRobin E. Soler,1 Krista Proia,1 Matthew C. Jackson,2 Andrew Lanza,1 Cynthia Klein,3 Jessica Leifer,4 and Matthew Darling4
1Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA2Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Engineering, Oak Ridge, TN3Abt Associates, Atlanta, GA4ideas42, New York, NY
Corresponding author: Robin E. Soler, [email protected]
https://doi.org/10.2337/ds18-0022
©2018 by the American Diabetes Association. Readers may use this article as long as the work is properly cited, the use is educational and not for profit, and the work is not altered. See http:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0 for details.
■ IN BRIEF In 2017, 30 million Americans had diabetes, and 84 million had prediabetes. In this article, the authors focus on the journey people at risk for type 2 diabetes take when they become fully engaged in an evidence-based type 2 diabetes prevention program. They highlight potential drop-off points along the journey, using behavioral economics theory to provide possible reasons for most of the drop-off points, and propose solutions to move people toward making healthy decisions.
V O L U M E 3 1 , N U M B E R 4 , F A L L 2 0 1 8 311
s o l e r e t a l .F
RO
M R
ES
EA
RC
H T
O P
RA
CT
ICE
must take to become fully engaged in an evidence-based type 2 diabe-tes prevention program. We also include alternative pathways because these represent possible points for redirection intervention. We high-light many aspects of the journey to type 2 diabetes prevention from increasing awareness of risk status to enrolling in a lifestyle change program. Understanding this jour-ney may provide a clearer picture of solutions needed to move consumers toward type 2 diabetes prevention. We highlight points at which con-sumers may drop off the journey, use behavioral economics theory to pro-vide possible explanations for these drop-off points, and offer solutions that health care providers (HCPs), health systems, and others may use to help guide consumers to make healthy lifestyle changes.
Type 2 Diabetes Prevention JourneyThe effectiveness of lifestyle change approaches (through dietary change and increased physical activity) in reducing type 2 diabetes risk, pri-marily through weight loss, has been well documented (10–15). In addi-tion, researchers and public health officials have considered how best to serve people based on their predicted risk level for developing type 2 dia-betes within a 10-year period (17). Albright and Gregg (17) proposed a four-tiered risk stratification ap-proach to type 2 diabetes prevention based on cost-effectiveness analyses and broader population health op-portunities for intervention. Those at greatest risk (10-year type 2 diabe-tes risk of 30–40%) are expected to benefit most from an evidence-based lifestyle change program (LCP) that can be implemented in community- based and clinical settings, as well as through digital technology.
In 2010, the CDC established the National Diabetes Prevention Program (National DPP) to cre-ate and support the conditions necessary for provision of an evidence-
based LCP (17–19). Although other approaches to type 2 diabetes pre-vention exist, including prescribing the drug metformin, research indi-cates that the LCP evaluated in the Diabetes Prevention Program research study is more effective in promoting weight loss than met-formin therapy (5.6 and 2.1 kg weight loss, respectively) (11), leads to lower cumulative incidence of type 2 diabe-tes over time (58 and 31% incidence rate reductions, respectively) (11–13), and can be effectively delivered by lay educators and clinical professionals (20).
Thus, our consumer journey uses the National DPP LCP as a focal point. Through the National DPP, consumers participate in a year-long LCP. The program is driven by a CDC-approved curriculum, includes a lifestyle coach that facilitates at least 22 sessions throughout the year, and typically takes place in an in-person group setting, although use of virtual programs is increasing (21).
To increase the number of people who are aware of their type 2 diabe-tes status and to understand where we can intervene to guide people at high risk for type 2 diabetes or with prediabetes into an evidence-based prevention program such as the National DPP, we need to under-stand the process people go through as they learn about their risk and get a diagnosis and, ideally, what motivates them to initiate change. Our journey map helps us “see” the consumer experience from awareness/education about prediabetes and type 2 diabetes to prevention through assessment of risk, diagnosis, and enrollment in the National DPP LCP (Figures 1 and 2). To improve recruitment, we were par-ticularly interested in understanding points at which consumers were at high risk for dropping off the journey.
Our type 2 diabetes consumer journey contains six key components, each of which offers cues or opportu-nities for application of a behavioral economics lens. The six components are 1) potential point of entry to the
journey, 2) behavioral determinants, 3) small consumer actions, 4) key consumer actions/desired outcomes, 5) key points of influence, and 6 ) potential drop-off points. Points of entry are represented by green arrows in Figures 1 and 2 and are most likely influenced through public and private communication channels. Behavioral determinants are represented by clear circles at contemplation points.
Throughout the consumer jour-ney, there are opportunities for contemplation that must occur before action is taken. Contemplation may include iterative thinking. This may be rapid or take time. In many cases, it may not happen consciously, with the consumer choosing an easy or comfortable option that may not be rational. Contemplation may include understanding (or not understand-ing) the information, risks, value, or options presented to them and per-forming a cost/benefit analysis; it will also include personalization or recog-nition of the individual’s status and, finally, decision-making.
In the journey map, small con-sumer actions are represented by blue circles, and key consumer actions are represented by inverted green tear drops. Small actions are necessary actions in the journey that may be missed but may also be facilitated by small interventions. Key actions are those that will likely define how the journey progresses.
Light bulbs represent key points of stakeholder influence. At these points, consumer-targeted interven-tions may be useful, but advancement to the next stage of the journey may also require intervention with one or more stakeholders.
Potential drop-off points are rep-resented by red triangles. It is at these drop-off points where simple consumer- focused solutions may move the con-sumer further along their journey toward a healthier lifestyle.
The journey map has three major sections: awareness and education, risk assessment and diagnosis, and enrollment in a National DPP LCP.
3 1 2 S P E C T R U M . D I A B E T E S J O U R N A L S . O R G
F R O M R E S E A R C H T O P R A C T I C E / T Y P E 2 D I A B E T E S P R E V E N T I O N
■ FIGURE 1. Diabetes: pre-diagnosis consumer journey.
■ FIGURE 2. Prediabetes enrollment phase.
V O L U M E 3 1 , N U M B E R 4 , F A L L 2 0 1 8 313
s o l e r e t a l .F
RO
M R
ES
EA
RC
H T
O P
RA
CT
ICE
Prediabetes has no symptoms. (22) Therefore, the journey likely begins with awareness and education (shar-ing of information). The goal of this stage is to instill an awareness of type 2 diabetes risk, which may include a diagnosis of prediabetes. Consumers enter this stage in many different ways; we focus on three: learning about or receiving information through a family or friend, seeking health information based on general interest, or receiving information from an HCP, a health fair, or media exposure. In many cases, information from an HCP may include a direct diagnosis from test results obtained during a routine physical examina-tion. Consumers may ignore the information or not feel a sense of urgency to act on this information and re-enter the awareness stage at a later time. This is the first poten-tial drop-off point in the journey. Ideally, consumers will respond by accepting the information, reaching the first desired outcome in the jour-ney (becoming informed), and enter a state of contemplating next steps.
The next goal in the journey is consumer engagement in a risk assess-ment. Formal risk assessment involves a blood test, typically performed by an HCP. However, the CDC, the American Diabetes Association, and other organizations provide ques-tion-based risk tests to give consumers an evidence-based indicator of their type 2 diabetes risk. Question-based risk tests often include recommen-dations to see an HCP, who can then diagnose prediabetes through a blood test. However, a consumer may engage in prevention activities motivated by a risk test alone, using information found outside of a health care system.
At this stage of the journey, some consumers will be diagnosed with type 2 diabetes or prediabetes, some will have glucose levels in the normal range but still be at risk for other reasons, and some will not be at risk. The consumer journey then becomes more complex, with greater need and
opportunity to interact with health care and community-based systems and HCPs, as well as greater need for contemplation and repeated action. There are also more opportunities for dropping off and more action needed to successfully prevent type 2 diabetes.
If consumers are determined to be at risk for type 2 diabetes or are diag-nosed with prediabetes, they should move toward prevention options. The most likely paths are depicted in Figure 2. For consumers with a diagnosis of prediabetes, the desired action is to engage in the evidence- based LCP offered through the National DPP. At the consumer level, there may be barriers to gaining access to this program, including a lack of knowledge about the program, lack of local availability, technology bar-riers (in the case of virtual offerings), and cost. A full discussion of these barriers is beyond the scope of this article. However, consumers may also interact with HCPs who recommend another approach, such as prescribing a drug such as metformin or recom-mending self-directed dietary change and physical activity.
The ChallengeWhen viewed in its entirety, the con-sumer journey gives us a sense of why interventions that address single barriers (e.g., lack of transportation) or more complex interventions (e.g., mass media campaigns) have only been partially successful in support-ing consumers through their jour-ney to the National DPP or to any intervention that requires multiple action points and sustained engage-ment. Consumers will face many internal and external challenges that a single-focus intervention may not address. Enrolling and participating in a program is a multi-stage process that may involve multiple small sys-tem or behavior changes throughout consumers’ ecosystems. Although most consumers will not be vulnera-ble to all drop-off points, the ecosys-
tem should have safeguards in place to prevent predictable drop-offs.
Beyond the Consumer, But in the JourneyThe journey described above and de-picted in Figures 1 and 2 involves a range of stakeholders in addition to consumers, including HCPs, payors, program or intervention providers, health systems, family and commu-nity members, policymakers, employ-ers (workplaces), and community- based partners. Although a full dis-play and description of these journeys is beyond the scope of this article, we provide in Table 1 lists of the basic roles these stakeholders play at each stage in the journey. Below, we de-scribe a brief example at the health care system/HCP level that may affect consumer awareness, education, and assessment for prediabetes.
When we consider the consumer journey and interventions targeting it, we generally assume that a health care system is available, with the knowl-edge and support to meet consumer needs. Although the National DPP, an evidence-based solution to preventing prediabetes, is available, little is known about whether health care systems and HCPs are prepared to address predi-abetes. In one study of 155 primary care providers, only 6% correctly iden-tified prediabetes risk factors, and only 17% were able to identify appropriate prediabetes fasting glucose and A1C parameters (23). In addition, the term prediabetes may be used differently by different HCPs (24).
Those with appropriate knowledge of type 2 diabetes and prediabetes must also have knowledge and aware-ness of and trust in prevention options. Tseng et al. (23) reported that, for management of prediabetes, behavioral weight loss programs were selected by only 11% of primary care providers as a recommended action for their patients.
HCPs may benefit from having clinical decision support and program locator tools integrated into their work flows to reduce their burden of facili-
3 1 4 S P E C T R U M . D I A B E T E S J O U R N A L S . O R G
F R O M R E S E A R C H T O P R A C T I C E / T Y P E 2 D I A B E T E S P R E V E N T I O N
TABLE 1. Ecosystem Stakeholder Roles in Consumer JourneyAwareness and Education Risk Assessment and Diagnosis Enrollment
• Asks about family history
• Asks about health behaviors
• Explains impact of healthy behaviors and health status
• Measures consumer’s BMI
• Encourages consumer to share diagnosis/genetic predisposition with family
• Considers health literacy
• Collects current medical status and medical history
• Assesses potential barriers to acting in a healthy way
• Considers insurance
• Follows up with consumer
• Assesses/screens for long-term risks for developing diabetes
• Discusses risk assessment results and consumer’s risk for diabetes
• Orders and conducts blood glucose test
• Educates on implications of diagnosis
• Assesses comorbidities and complications
• Assesses potential barriers to and facilitators of action
• Refers to necessary LCP or HCPs
• Follows up with consumer
• Educates on prevention options and the importance of healthy lifestyle for preventing type 2 diabetes
• Gives consumer LCP referral
• Informs LCP that consumer was referred
• Refers to other resources
• Prescribes necessary medication
• Fills necessary prescription
• Follows up on referrals to LCP or other HCPs
• Ensures that intake forms include type 2 diabetes risk assessment
• Offers information on prediabe-tes and diabetes across health clinics
• Develops clinical quality mea-sures for prediabetes and diabetes
• Coordinates and shares information across HCP groups
• Clarifies treatment guidelines
• Accepts new patients
• Accepts health insurance
• Uses patient-generated health data
• Refers to necessary LCP or HCPs
• Acknowledges National DPP
• Offers electronic health record system that flags diabetes risk factors and prompts HCPs to offer blood glucose test
• Clarifies treatment guidelines
• Develops guidance for staff to educate patients on diagnoses
• Develops referrals and connections across clinics
• Informs consumer of referral
• National DPP ❍ Promotes DPP
• Research and surveillance ❍ Clarifies processes and
assumptions in patient care ❍ Researches risk factors ❍ Provides care guidelines ❍ Conducts disease research ❍ Develops health information
tools ❍ Establishes health literacy
guidelines ❍ Identifies best practices for
prevention
• Education ❍ Raises awareness of type
1 and type 2 diabetes and prediabetes
• National DPP ❍ Develops risk assessment ❍ Promotes risk assessment ❍ Updates risk assessment ❍ Institutionalizes risk
assessment ❍ Improves cost-effectiveness ❍ Provides navigation
assistance for consumer referrals
• Research and surveillance ❍ Clarifies patient care
processes ❍ Standardizes care guidelines ❍ Develops reporting
mechanisms and standards ❍ Expands outreach/screening ❍ Clarifies diagnosis standards
• National DPP ❍ Develops partnerships with
organizations and program providers
❍ Increases program referrals ❍ Provides program technical
assistance ❍ Expands reimbursement and
cost coverage resources ❍ Develops marketing
mechanisms ❍ Improves cost-effectiveness ❍ Identifies and develops best
practices for enrollment and retention
❍ Offers list of DPP classes, including locations and times
• Research and surveillance ❍ Develops care and program
quality measures ❍ Clarify processes and
assumptions in patient care
HC
PH
ealt
h C
are
Syst
em
CD
C
TABLE CONTINUED ON P. 315 →
V O L U M E 3 1 , N U M B E R 4 , F A L L 2 0 1 8 315
s o l e r e t a l .F
RO
M R
ES
EA
RC
H T
O P
RA
CT
ICE
tating the consumer journey (25,26). This integration covers the most basic connections needed between health care systems, HCPs, and consum-ers. Interventions focusing solely on consumers without considering the
limitations of health care systems and HCPs may have less-than-opti-mal results, not because of consumers dropping off, but rather because of knowledge and awareness gaps at the system or HCP level.
Developing Solutions Using a Behavioral Economics LensMany health interventions focus on addressing tangible barriers to sup-port consumers through their jour-ney, such as making programs more
TABLE 1. Ecosystem Stakeholder Roles in Consumer JourneyAwareness and Education Risk Assessment and Diagnosis Enrollment
• Covers/subsidizes prevention tools
• Incentivizes preventive behaviors
• Covers/subsidizes health care acquisition
• Covers/subsidizes risk test/ screening
• Covers/subsidizes program costs
• Shares personal stories/family history of diabetes
• Creates informal support groups to encourage healthy behavior options
• Shares health education/infor-mation materials
• Works with HCP organizations to develop health education materials
• Encourages screening and blood glucose testing
• Shares information on where/how to get a type 2 diabetes risk assessment
• Supports community members in identifying risks and fears
• Encourages consumer to act
• Shares personal stories
• Encourages consumer to visit HCP with risk assessment results
• Provides referral to HCPs
• Helps consumer understand/ process test results
• Shares personal stories and support for the newly diagnosed consumer
• Talks through information and questions for HCP
• Encourages participation in DPP or other LCP
• Shares information on resources to support lifestyle change
• Monitors/stays alert for any changes in diet, activity, or mental status of consumer
• Encourages healthy lifestyle
• Manages data collection, warehousing, analysis, and reporting
• Develops information-sharing guidelines
• Standardizes guidelines and reporting requirements
• Monitors insurance provision
• Ensures that risk assessment has accurate content
• Manages data collection, warehousing, analysis, and reporting
• Develops, standardizes, and manages guidelines and reporting requirements
• Monitors insurance provision
• Supports health screenings
• Provides health education materials
• Offers healthy food and physical activity opportunities
• Offers effective insurance provision
• Offers formal or informal support groups or office hours
• Creates smoke-free environments
• Offers incentives or health screenings
• Holds information sessions on prevention options
• Has HCPs available for consultation
• Offers insurance that covers DPP
• Brings in health educators to discuss diagnoses/answer questions
• Allows fitness breaks for employees
• Hosts DPP in the workspace
• Supports health screenings
• Provides health education materials
• Offers healthy food and physical activity opportunities
• Creates smoke-free environments
• Offers incentives or health screenings
• Helps consumer enroll and participate in the DPP
• Offers DPP classes
• Provides case management/ navigation while consumer is enrolled in the DPP
• Provides financial assistance for medications as needed
Pay
or
Fam
ily/C
om
mu
nity
Po
licym
ake
rW
ork
pla
ceC
om
mu
nity
Par
tne
rTABLE 1. Ecosystem Stakeholder Roles in Consumer Journey, continued from p. 314
3 1 6 S P E C T R U M . D I A B E T E S J O U R N A L S . O R G
F R O M R E S E A R C H T O P R A C T I C E / T Y P E 2 D I A B E T E S P R E V E N T I O N
accessible by providing transporta-tion, child care, or tailored informa-tion (27–29). Behavioral economics– informed solutions may be much smaller and address subtler, less tan-gible challenges associated with po-tential drop-off points during these contemplation states.
Behavioral economics considers the effects of psychological, social, cognitive, and emotional factors on the decisions individuals make. This feature is in contrast to conventional economic theory, which assumes that individuals make decisions as if they were making rational choices to maximize a set of preferences (27–31). Interventions that use a behavioral economics lens look at ways in which human behavior can depart from rational-actor models and aim to mit-igate the effects of cognitive biases or other inconsistences.
Key principles of behavioral economics are used to develop inter-ventions or solutions that “nudge” people to make a decision or complete a small action (28,30–32). Matheson et al. (33) argue that provision of “spe-cific and deliberate steps” is needed to resolve challenges leading to chronic disease. Wood and Neal (34) argue that, to create a new habit, three types of interventions must be offered in tandem: those that encourage behavior repetition, those that create stable context cues, and those that are given in an uncertain way or at ran-dom intervals (such as slot machines). We agree with these approaches but suggest that multi-component approaches, addressing challenges at multiple points with multiple stake-holders along the journey, may be more effective. Multiple behavioral economics–informed solutions can also be used in combination to drive consumers toward mindset change and, if repeated over time and in combination, can lead to the habit formation necessary for type 2 diabe-tes prevention efforts to be effective.
Evidence for use of behavioral economics for long-term change, particularly for health behaviors, is
sparse, although conceptual models have been proposed (35). In addi-tion, it may be unclear who should be nudged, when they should be nudged, and how they should be nudged. In Table 2, we provide examples of how a behavioral eco-nomics lens can help answer these questions. From the consumer jour-ney described in Figures 1 and 2, we draw from the stages and drop-off points (barriers). From the behav-ioral economics literature, we use 12 concepts (availability bias, salience, limited attention, learned helpless-ness, “ostriching,” overconfidence, self-categorization, social influence, identity, loss-aversion, present bias, and scarcity) related to the identified barriers and provide solutions that fit the nudge concept of behavioral economics (and in most cases are low in cost and scalable) (36). Finally, we name the stakeholders in the consum-ers’ ecology who would implement the solutions (acknowledging that, in some cases, the solutions, such as building in reminders, can be applied to stakeholders as well).
Select Solutions at Key Points in the Consumer JourneyTo improve success at the awareness stage, behavioral economics solutions can be used to drive Web traffic to risk assessments, prediabetes infor-mation, and the National DPP. One option is to modify health cards that appear on many search engine pages when searching for common health terms such as prediabetes or type 2 diabetes. To increase discovery of a National DPP LCP, solutions may in-clude adding links to facilitate action and including language to increase a sense of urgency or self-efficacy.
To help create a sense of urgency during the awareness stage, barri-ers created by ostriching (ignoring bad news) and uncertainty aversion (leading to avoiding decisions) can be addressed by optimizing recruitment material through personalization of content and integrating planning prompts and reminders. Changes
such as these can help consumers see the value of enrolling at that moment instead of putting it off for later.
Using interventions that leverage social referrals, relying on friends and family or program champions, builds on the behavioral economics principles of social norms and social networks. Using social referrals may help address self-categorization, through which consumers men-tally put themselves in the “in group” (those participating in life-style change) and avoid preferences or activities of an “out group.” The principle of social accountability, which posits that people are more likely to stick to their commitments and exhibit pro-social behavior when they know others are watching, may also come into play.
Health care systems and community-based programs may be able to leverage electronic health records to increase screening, testing, and referrals by HCPs and can use behavioral economics principles to optimize prediabetes risk tests and tools to facilitate finding an appropri-ate National DPP LCP. Finally, once a consumer has made a commitment to connect with a National DPP LCP, the program can offer an informa-tional session that employs multiple nudges to shift the consumer mindset to enroll.
Incorporating solutions such as optimized recruitment material and information sessions can help par-ticipants learn that the benefits of completing the National DPP LCP far outweigh the commitment they must make, leading them to decide if the program is a good fit. An infor-mation session built on the principle of endowed progress, through which consumers persist in a process when they believe that they have already successfully taken at least one action toward their end goal, may lead to continued participation in that pro-cess. Other principles, such as mental contrasting (a visualization tech-nique and problem-solving tool that strengthens goal pursuit by address-
V O L U M E 3 1 , N U M B E R 4 , F A L L 2 0 1 8 317
s o l e r e t a l .F
RO
M R
ES
EA
RC
H T
O P
RA
CT
ICE
TAB
LE 2
. H
ow
Beh
avio
ral
Eco
nom
ics
Can
Exp
lain
and
Fac
ilita
te C
ons
umer
s’ E
nro
llmen
t in
the
Nat
iona
l D
PP
’s L
CP
Aw
are
ness
and
Ed
uca
tio
n
(bec
om
e aw
are
of t
ype
2 d
iab
etes
ris
k an
d
dec
ide
to c
hang
e b
ehav
ior)
Ris
k A
sse
ssm
ent
and
Dia
gno
sis
(d
isco
ver
a N
atio
nal D
PP L
CP
and
are
rec
epti
ve t
o in
for-
mat
ion
abo
ut it
)
En
rollm
ent
(d
ecid
e th
e p
rog
ram
is a
go
od
fit
now
and
enr
oll
in a
n up
com
ing
cl
ass)
Bar
rier
s (d
rop
-off
p
oin
ts)
Do
no
t fe
el a
n ur
gen
t ne
ed
to a
ct
Mis
per
ceiv
e ty
pe
2 d
iab
etes
ris
k an
d a
bili
ty t
o
chan
ge
it
Lack
so
cial
in
fluen
ceD
o n
ot
feel
an
urg
ent
need
to
ac
t
Mis
per
ceiv
e ty
pe
2 d
ia-
bet
es r
isk
and
ab
ility
to
cha
nge
it
Lack
so
cial
in
fluen
ce
Mis
per
ceiv
e th
at
com
mit-
men
t co
sts
out
wei
gh
pro
gra
m’s
fu
ture
b
enefi
ts
Lack
so
cial
in
fluen
ceM
isp
erce
ive
that
co
mm
itm
ent
cost
s o
utw
eig
h p
rog
ram
’s fu
ture
b
enefi
ts
Beh
avio
ral
eco
nom
ic
conc
epts
Ava
ilab
ility
b
ias,
* sa
lienc
e,†
limit
ed
atte
ntio
n‡
Lear
ned
he
lple
ssne
ss,§
o
stri
chin
g,||
o
verc
on-
fiden
ce,¶
se
lf-ca
teg
ori
-za
tio
n#
Soci
al
influ
ence
,**
iden
tity
††
Ava
ilab
ility
b
ias,
* sa
lienc
e,†
limit
ed
atte
ntio
n‡
Lear
ned
he
lple
ss-
ness
,§
ost
rich
ing
,||
ove
rco
n-fid
ence
,¶
self-
cate
go
-ri
zati
on#
Soci
al
influ
ence
,**
iden
tity
††
Loss
-av
ersi
on,
‡‡
pre
sent
b
ias,
§§
scar
city
||||
Soci
al
influ
ence
,**
iden
tity
††
Loss
-ave
rsio
n,‡‡
p
rese
nt b
ias,
§§
scar
city
||||
Poss
ible
so
luti
ons
Plan
ning
pro
mp
ts, p
rom
oti
on
mat
eria
ls p
rovi
d-
ing
cle
ar a
nd a
ctio
nab
le n
ext
step
s, p
erso
nal-
ized
pro
mo
tio
n m
ater
ials
, bui
lt-in
rem
ind
ers,
us
e o
f wo
rd-o
f-m
out
h re
ferr
als,
phy
sici
an r
efer
-ra
ls, p
rovi
sio
n o
f sal
ient
exa
mp
les
of s
ucce
ss
Use
of w
ord
-of-
mo
uth
refe
rral
s, p
rovi
sio
n o
f pro
gra
m
det
ails
fro
m a
tru
sted
so
urce
, pro
visi
on
of s
alie
nt e
xam
-p
les
of s
ucce
ss, c
ont
inue
d s
upp
ort
by
refe
rrer
, op
po
r-tu
niti
es fo
r m
ing
ling
wit
h p
rog
ram
par
tici
pan
ts
Co
nnec
ting
par
tici
pan
t w
ith
a lif
esty
le c
hang
e co
ach,
ad
dre
ssin
g
que
stio
ns a
bo
ut p
rog
ram
det
ails
an
d c
ost
s, s
elf-
affir
mat
ion
acti
viti
es,
op
po
rtun
itie
s fo
r m
ing
ling
wit
h p
rog
ram
par
tici
pan
ts
Stak
eho
lder
in
terv
enti
ons
(le
vels
)
LCPs
(Fam
ily a
nd C
om
mun
ity,
HC
P, H
ealt
h C
are
Syst
em)
LCPs
(Fam
ily a
nd C
om
mun
ity)
*Ava
ilab
ility
bia
s: p
rop
ensi
ty to
ove
rwei
gh
the
likel
iho
od
of a
n ev
ent h
app
enin
g b
ased
on
how
eas
ily th
at e
vent
co
mes
to m
ind
. †Sa
lienc
e: th
e d
egre
e to
whi
ch a
n ite
m o
r cho
ice
stan
ds
out
and
cap
ture
s o
ur a
tten
tion.
‡Li
mite
d a
tten
tion:
pre
vent
s us
fro
m w
eig
hing
all
op
tions
eq
ually
; thu
s, o
ur c
hoic
es b
eco
me
easi
ly a
ffec
ted
b
y w
hich
fact
ors
are
mo
st s
alie
nt. §
Lear
ned
hel
ple
ssne
ss: t
he b
elie
f tha
t one
has
litt
le c
ont
rol o
ver a
situ
atio
n an
d th
at n
o ac
tion
can
imp
rove
or c
hang
e an
o
utco
me.
||O
stric
hing
: “b
uryi
ng o
ne’s
hea
d in
the
sand
” w
hen
ther
e is
a p
oss
ibili
ty o
f bad
new
s. ¶
Ove
rco
nfid
ence
: bei
ng s
urer
of o
ne’s
ow
n b
elie
fs, p
red
ictio
ns,
feel
ing
s, a
nd a
bili
ties
than
an
ob
ject
ive
eval
uatio
n w
oul
d w
arra
nt. #
Self-
cate
go
rizat
ion:
peo
ple
inna
tely
und
erst
and
them
selv
es a
nd o
ther
s th
roug
h ca
teg
ori-
cal d
istin
ctio
ns p
laci
ng th
emse
lves
in a
n “i
n g
roup
” am
ong
oth
ers
with
sim
ilar c
hara
cter
istic
s. *
*So
cial
influ
ence
: whe
n p
eop
le th
ey fe
el c
lose
to a
nd tr
ust,
like
frie
nds,
fam
ily, c
om
mun
ity m
emb
ers,
and
do
cto
rs, i
nstr
uct t
hem
to ta
ke a
ctio
n, th
ey u
sual
ly li
sten
. ††I
den
tity:
peo
ple
act
on
the
bas
is o
f diff
eren
t gro
up id
entit
ies,
w
hich
shi
ft a
nd c
an b
eco
me
mo
re o
r les
s p
rom
inen
t at d
iffer
ent m
om
ents
and
in d
iffer
ent c
ont
exts
. ‡‡L
oss
-ave
rsio
n: th
e te
nden
cy to
ove
rwei
gh
loss
es re
lativ
e to
g
ains
of t
he s
ame
mag
nitu
de.
§§P
rese
nt b
ias:
the
idea
that
the
imp
act o
f a c
hoic
e o
r act
ion
we
mak
e o
r tak
e no
w is
real
ly im
po
rtan
t. |||
|Sca
rcity
: hav
ing
a c
hro
nic
lack
of r
eso
urce
s, w
hich
lead
s in
div
idua
ls to
focu
s th
eir a
tten
tion
on
imm
edia
te n
eed
s as
op
po
sed
to lo
ng-t
erm
one
s.
3 1 8 S P E C T R U M . D I A B E T E S J O U R N A L S . O R G
F R O M R E S E A R C H T O P R A C T I C E / T Y P E 2 D I A B E T E S P R E V E N T I O N
ing perceived obstacles in advance), self-affirmation (reminding people about their past accomplishments to counteract their natural defensiveness or apathy) and self-disclosure (the vol-untary action of telling others more detail about yourself ) can inform activities within information sessions to further encourage enrollment.
Discussion Encouraging people to participate in and maintain a healthy lifestyle to prevent chronic disease remains a public health challenge, as evidenced by the overall prevalence of chronic disease, and for some specific diseas-es, increasing incidence rates (37,38). Several challenges exist in informing, recruiting or referring, and enrolling consumers into an LCP and, ulti-mately, having consumers participate in and complete such an intervention and maintain a healthy lifestyle once it is over. This is often the case even when evidence-based interventions are available. Even pharmacological approaches, such as the use of met-formin, are fraught with adherence challenges (39).
A successful approach, given the complexity and comprehensive nature of the barriers, should be multi- faceted. First, those seeking to inter-vene should try to understand the full journeys consumers will take and their potential drop-off points or bar-riers to a successful journey. Program implementers can then integrate their role and the role other stakeholders play in circumventing the barriers.
In the case of type 2 diabetes prevention, an evidence-based inter-vention exists. Although the journey is complex, CDC and others have proposed integrated approaches at the local, state, and national levels (37), and we have proposed using multi-ple nudge solutions at various levels in the consumer ecosystem to ensure that consumers successfully navigate this journey.
The growth in chronic disease, particularly in new cases of type 2 diabetes, warrants implementing evi-
dence-based interventions to address this pressing health challenge. Doing so would lead to improvements in health, a reduction in type 2 diabe-tes incidence, and, ultimately, costs savings at both the individual and societal level resulting from increased productivity and lower medical costs.
DisclaimerThe findings and conclusions in this report are those of the authors and do not neces-sarily represent the official position of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
AcknowledgmentsThe authors thank LaShonda Hulbert, Shawn Jawanda, Renee Skeete, Stephanie Rutledge, Erin Keyes, and Meklit B. Hailemeskal for reviewing the manuscript and participating in the creation of the consumer journey concept. Tara Earl par-ticipated in conceptualization of behavioral economics solutions to consumer drop-off points, and Shing Zhang and Nancy Silver created the visual representation of the consumer journey.
Duality of InterestNo potential conflicts of interest relevant to this article were reported.
Author ContributionsR.E.S. wrote the manuscript and drafted the consumer journey. K.P., M.C.J., and A.L. reviewed/edited the manuscript and contributed to the development of Table 1 and the consumer journey. C.K., J.L., and M.D. reviewed/edited the manuscript and contributed to the development of Table 1. R.E.S. is the guarantor of this work and takes full responsibility for its content.
References1. American Diabetes Association. Economic costs of diabetes in the U.S. in 2017. Diabetes Care 2018;41:917–928
2. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Diabetes Report Card 2017. Atlanta, Ga., Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2018
3. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Prediabetes. Available from www.cdc.gov/diabetes/basics/prediabetes.html. Accessed 5 April 2018
4. Task Force on Community Preventive Services. Recommendations for client- and provider-directed interventions to increase breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening. Am J Prev Med 2008;35(Suppl. 1):S21–S25
5. The Community Guide. Increasing cancer screening: multicomponent interventions. Available from www.thecommunityguide.
org/sites/default/files/assets/Cancer-Screening-Multicomponent-Interventions.pdf. Accessed 5 April 2018
6. The Community Guide. Reducing tobacco use and secondhand smoke exposure: mass-reach health communica-tion interventions. Available from www.thecommunityguide.org/sites/default/files/assets/Tobacco-Mass-Reach-Health-Communication.pdf. Accessed 5 April 2018
7. The Community Guide. Preventing birth defects: community-wide campaigns to promote the use of folic acid supplements. Available from www.thecommunityguide.org/sites/default/files/assets/Birth-Defects-Community-Wide-Promote-Folic-Acid.pdf. Accessed 5 April 2018
8. Siu AL; U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for abnormal blood glucose and type 2 diabetes mellitus: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recom-mendation statement. Ann Intern Med 2015;163:861–868
9. Yeh MC, Heo M, Suchday S, et al. Translation of the Diabetes Prevention Program for diabetes risk reduction in Chinese immigrants in New York City. Diabet Med 2016;33:547–551
10. Li G, Zhang P, Wang J, et al. The long‐term effect of lifestyle interventions to prevent diabetes in the China da Qing Diabetes Prevention Study: a 20‐year fol-low‐up study. Lancet 2008;371:1783–1789
11. Knowler WC, Barrett-Conner E, Fowler SE, et al.; DPP Research Group. Reduction in the incidence of type 2 diabetes with lifestyle intervention or metformin. N Engl J Med 2002;346:393–403
12. DPP Research Group; Knowler WC, Fowler SE, Hamman RF, et al. 10-year follow-up of diabetes incidence and weight loss in the Diabetes Prevention Program Outcomes Study. Lancet 2009;374:1677–1686
13. DPP Research Group. Long-term effects of lifestyle intervention or metformin on diabetes development and microvascular complications over 15-year follow-up: the Diabetes Prevention Program Outcomes Study. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol 2015;3:866–875
14. Weinhold KR, Miller CK, Marrero DG, Nagaraja HN, Focht BC, Gascon GM. A randomized controlled trial translating the Diabetes Prevention Program to a university worksite, Ohio, 2012–2014. Prev Chronic Dis 2015;12:E210
15. Kerrison G, Gillis RB, Jiwani SI, et al. The effectiveness of lifestyle adapta-tion for the prevention of prediabetes in adults: a systematic review. J Diabetes Res 2017;2017:8493145
16. Powell P, Spears K, Rebori M. What is obesogenic environment? Availble from www.unce.unr.edu/publications/files/hn/2010/fs1011.pdf. Accessed 16 April 2018
17. Albright AL, Gregg EW. Preventing type 2 diabetes in communities across the U.S: the National Diabetes Prevention
V O L U M E 3 1 , N U M B E R 4 , F A L L 2 0 1 8 319
s o l e r e t a l .F
RO
M R
ES
EA
RC
H T
O P
RA
CT
ICE
Program. Am J Prev Med 2013;44(4 Suppl. 4):S346–S351
18. Albright A. Prevention of type 2 diabetes requires BOTH intensive lifestyle interven-tions and population-wide approaches. Am J Manag Care 2015;21(Suppl. 7):S238–S239
19. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. What is the National DPP? Available from www.cdc.gov/diabetes/ prevention/about/index.html. Accessed 5 April 2018
20. Ali MK, Echouffo-Tcheugui J, Williamson DF. How effective were lifestyle interventions in real-world settings that were modeled on the Diabetes Prevention Program? Health Aff (Millwood) 2012;31:67–75
21. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Lifestyle change program details. Available from www.cdc.gov/ diabetes/prevention/lifestyle-program/ experience/index.html. Accessed 12 April 2018
22. The Mayo Clinic. Prediabetes: over-view. Available from www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/prediabetes/symptoms- causes/syc-20355278. Accessed 12 April 2018
23. Tseng E, Greer RC, O’Rourke P, et al. Survey of primary care providers’ knowl-edge of screening for, diagnosing and managing prediabetes. J Gen Intern Med 2017;32:1172–1178
24. Thomas JJ, Moring JC, Baker S, et al. Do words matter? Health care providers’ use of the term prediabetes. Health Risk Soc 2017;19:5–6, 301–315
25. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Clinical decision support. Available from www.ahrq.gov/professionals/
prevention-chronic-care/decision/clinical/index.html. Accessed 10 May 2018
26. Kawamoto K, Houlihan CA, Balas EA, Lobach DF. Improving clinical practices using clinical decision support systems: a systematic review of trials to identify fea-tures critical to success. BMJ 2005;330:765
27. Richburg-Hayes L, Anzelone C, Dechausay N, et al. Behavioral Economics and Social Policy: Designing Innovative Solutions for Programs Supported by the Administration for Children and Families. OPRE Report No. 2014-16a. Washington, D.C., Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation, Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2014. Available from http://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/opre/bias_final_full_report_rev4_15_14.pdf. Accessed 12 April 2018
28. Thaler R, Benartzi S. Save More Tomorrow™: using behavioral econom-ics to increase employee saving. J Pol Econ 2004;112:S164–S187. Available from www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/pdf-plus/10.1086/380085. Accessed 12 April 2018
29. Chang LL, DeVore AD, Granger BB, Eapen ZJ, Ariely D, Hernandez AF. Leveraging behavioral economics to improve heart failure care and outcomes. Circulation 2017;136:765–772
30. Thaler R, Sustein C. Nudge: Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth, and Happiness. London, U.K., Penguin Books, 2008
31. Thaler RH, Sunstein CR, Balz JP. Choice architecture. Available from papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1583509. Accessed 12 April 2018
32. The Behavioral Insights Team. EAST: four simple ways to apply
behavioral insights. Available from behaviouralinsights.co.uk/publications/east-four-simple-ways-apply-behavioural-insights. Accessed 12 April 2018
33. Matheson GO, Pacione C, Shultz RK, Klugl M. Leveraging human-centered design in chronic disease prevention. Am J Prev Med 2015;48:472–479
34. Wood W, Neal D. Healthy through habit: interventions for initiating and main-taining health behavior change. Behav Sci Pol 2016;2:71–83
35. Mogler BK, Shu SB, Fox CR, et al. Using insights from behavioral econom-ics and social psychology to help patients manage chronic diseases. J Gen Intern Med 2013;28:711–718
36. Samson A (Ed.). The Behavioral Economics Guide 2016. Available from http://www.behavioraleconomics.com. Accessed 12 April 2018
37. Gatwood JD, Chisholm-Burns M, Davis R, et al. Disparities in initial oral antidia-betic medication adherence among veterans with incident diabetes. J Manag Care Spec Pharm 2018;24:379–389
38. Bauer UE, Briss PA, Goodman RA, Bowman BA. Prevention of chronic disease in the 21st century: elimination of the leading preventable causes of death and disability in the USA. Lancet 2014;384:45–52
39. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Leading causes of death and numbers of deaths, by sex, race, and Hispanic origin: United States, 1980 and 2014. In Health, United States, 2015. Available from www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/hus/hus15.pdf#019. Accessed 10 May 2018